Hot answers tagged

16

5 Idiotic Space Travel Ideas (That Might Actually Work) I think we shouldn't discourage sane ideas or honest inquiries about their feasibility, even if they seem a bit far out. Many of current technologies we all use were first envisioned in Sci-Fi literature, and a lot of these ideas were seen as crazy and/or infeasible at the time. Another point could be,...


15

The border is incredibly soft. The more diverse SE sites exist, the more complicated it becomes to put a question into a specific category. Was it ever considered at SE to implement "cross-posts" in any way? Let's say, a question is asked here in space exploration, but it is listed by the author in e.g. astronomy and physics too? From my point of view, ...


13

Fundementally, Stack Exchange likes to have something about the size of a college department. At my University (University of Arizona), there were 4 college departments that fall roughly in to the space of this site, to some extent. Lunar and Planetary Laboratory- Science of space rocks, moons, etc, with a focus on data from spacecraft. Astronomy and ...


12

The problem may be in the nature of this (closed) beta. There are mostly enthusiast and generally interested people around, little professionals with a background of any sort in space exploration. I think this place needs some more professionals. Let's invite them ... Somehow, I don't see this place becoming the discussion forum for space professionals ...


12

I'll bite: advancement of planetary science is currently the main goal of space exploration. Thus, on-topic at SEx.SE. Specifically: On-topic questions about lithosphere, atmosphere, hydro/cryosphere, ionosphere of Solar System bodies, if these questions can be answered with current or near future technology (regardless of where the scientific equipment ...


12

Advice about dangerous personal amateur projects is off-topic Understand that space exploration is inherently dangerous. While there are some foolhardy people who have done amateur work in this area, the Space.SE community has decided that we will not help people engaged in amateur endeavors to get into low orbit and/or space--at least where it concerns ...


12

I don't feel too strongly about it, but I lean towards saying it's on-topic; we have a few "what does this terminology used by astronauts mean" questions, and just because the answer applies to aviation as well as astronautics doesn't make it off-topic. I agree that we don't need one Q/A per NATO phonetic alphabet codeword. :)


10

Erg, I don't know about this. It does seem a little radical, and I'm not sure if it's the best fit. In my opinion, they are completely different subjects. Astronomy is the study of the stars, etc. From the Astronomy proposal, it's a site for astronomers and astrophysicists. From what I understand, here we are a site for questions about the engineering ...


10

Absolutely. Anything to do with spacecraft, or the science they return, is on topic here. Same goes with theoretical studies relating to such exploration. There comes a point where the science is less on topic, specifically, if it comes from an aggregate view of the universe. The weather of exoplanets is probably off topic here, for instance. But any ...


10

Note: had the battery been Pu-239 - and a bunch of RTG batteries used in space missions are made from decommissioned nukes, so a person not informed on details of the mission could reasonably expect that was the case - the theory cited would have been quite viable. That wasn't the case, end of story, case closed, thank you. My opinion is a short, quick and ...


10

No, I'm personally against defining reasons for what is or isn't within the scope of our Q&A based on popular literature, their respective authors, or popularity of the topics they wrote about within their popular literature titles, because that might in itself imply greater credibility of such sources and their respective authors than it might be ...


9

The border is soft, but here's where I draw the line. If it is about spacecraft operations, or engineering, it belongs here. If it is a very general physics question, then it could best go there. Some questions could fit in to either category (How does an Ion Engine work). Space Exploration How much fuel do I need to get to go to __? Physics What is ...


8

I'd say that they are on-topic as long as it relates to space exploration. If it's about weather, no. If it's about testing space equipment, sure!


8

I'm against issuing a specific regulation on this sort of questions. JCRM is right - if the question didn't show any research effort or is completely misguided, we already have tools to deal with that. Downvotes, close votes (unclear, off-topic, too broad). Sometimes though the questions are quite interesting, and yield good answers referencing obscure but ...


7

I'd say as long as it's more of sci- than -fi they should be perfectly welcome. Distant, unreachable currently but technically viable ideas as Neumann Probe should be definitely on-topic. I wouldn't be too hostile against the more -fi questions. We can have great fun dismantling them, and every SE site should have some recreational topics, something to have ...


7

While I understand your concerns, doing such (grouping together some very vast fields of study) undermines the purpose of Stack Exchange all together. We are trying to build libraries of specialized and specific information, so something such as a broad question really doesn't fit. That being said, it always bugs me to turn people down who are asking genuine ...


7

Here's the thing about Python. It is an extremely popular choice for this type of thing because it has a bunch of great libraries, so I'm not sure we can avoid questions involving Python. As much as possible these questions should be about the actual implementation of space operations in Python and not the usage of a particular library, or the regular usage ...


6

Space flight and space exploration has always been a bit of science fiction. Some people believed in obviously crazy ideas and had a hard time defending them before they actually became reality. So, in a way, it is a rather soft border, if there is any, between reality and sci-fi in terms of space. So, going by your example, a Dyson sphere is not only sci-fi,...


6

A few step process: Reward the good questions. Upvote them, provide well researched answers, etc. Ask new good questions. I'm personally planning on doing this more over the course of the next few days. Close the cruft. Look for questions that just don't seem to fit really well, and close them. Fix the tags My goal is to work on these items over the course ...


6

The original Astronomy proposal never got out of beta - it was eaten up by Physics, where it seems to sit quite well. If the new Astronomy proposal gets into Beta I am not sure what would happen to the questions from the old Astronomy site - perhaps they would go into the new one? Or maybe the new site will suffer the same fate and lose its Physics based ...


6

I have some simple guidelines I follow for every question that pops up: Is it about space exploration, or substantially related to it? This, I find, is a fairly good filter. It allows us to keep questions like Could black holes be used for swing-by? While nuking https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/518/what-would-happen-if-you-dropped-a-...


6

It can be hard to draw the line. Who determines what is a nutcase theory and what isn't? If the source is notable enough, perhaps some of those would fit on Skeptics.


6

Well, what other questions are we supposed to have? Rocket science, artificial satellites, and their operation? Good, but what purpose would they serve, if not gathering data on the Earth, the Sun, the Moon, and all other celestial bodies, their interactions, and prospects for our use of them to our advantage, beyond merely observing shiny object twinkling ...


6

Point 1: Terraforming should be on topic here, so long as it's kept realistic. There have been many questions on the subject, and there doesn't seem to be a good reason to ban them. Point 2: I'm not sure if I care. I've started a post on MSO asking about this question, what to do about unintentional cross posting, hopefully the community there will come up ...


6

A few additional points. planetary-science is definitely on topic here. I don't think the public completely mixes the space/ astronomy, although there is a perception that they are in the same realm. I don't know of anyone who calls sending a space probe to Jupiter Astronomy, that seems fundamentally different than studying the stars. There are many ...


6

My take on this. The Space Shuttle is always a spacecraft, and occasionally a plane. That means pretty much every question you have about it is on-topic here. By contrast, only specific aspects about the shuttle are on-topic at aviation.SE, in most cases that means the landing phase. If a question is on-topic both places, you should consider where the ...


5

When I answered it, I thought it was here, because I wasn't really paying attention. I agree, this site is a better fit, and I've moved it over here. The science fiction references are okay, but the tags will need to be changed, but I've done that for now, feel free to change if required.


5

I would be concerned that these type questions do not progress us towards a site for "spacecraft operators, scientists, engineers, and enthusiasts."


5

The appropriate format is the site blog. Of course, we don't have a blog, so that's a bit problematic... Short of that, brag about it in chat?


5

OK, let's go top down. The first one you mention, How long is the aerodynamic heating during reentry? is closed as too broad because there is no way to give even rough estimates for an unknown, yet specific launch vehicle that OP later mentions in the comments, and then rather asks for a simulation software (a whole different question), where he would have ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible